KickStarter Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Shilandra]

I only ever played a few tabletop games in my youth and one of the things that always stuck with me was a character my friend made. He was a tiefling looking for a new home. His childhood was warm and loving even despite his race and he only left home because he wanted to find a nice village to settle down in and find a wife. The call to adventure flowed naturally from that and it combined easily with the conflict of whatever the setting and prejudices were. he was always a joy to play with and made me really like the simple, motivation driven approach to character bios. Ones that aren't necessarily focused on the past to determine motivations, but ones focused on what the character desires for the future.

That's why some of these bios seem just overwritten to me at least. I know the past can shape who you are but they seem to lack what is actually motivating the characters in the present and want they actually want to do. Except maybe the chronicler halfling.

 

[Life of the Party]

Take a look at Michael.

 

[Lacrymas]

I really don't see any problem here and yet you are displaying a lot of angst over it.

A lot of angst? You seem to be projecting, I only made a simple observation. The problem is a literary and contextual one, how do you write a paladin to not be out of place with other characters who are more let's say flawed, yet still retain their "devotion to goodness". And how would that character look like and behave.

 

[Shilandra]

Were you one of those who written half drow half werewolf half vampire girls with white hair with black stripes who were also bisexual and had 6 pages of biography? cause we need to have a talk.


btw, race is one of another interesting things about making characters. Naturally you can battle half drow werewolves by simply introducing a set amount of races to pick from (at which point, everyone would pick half elves by the way, because they are like humans, but elves but have no flaws and are HALF, and HALF everything is awesome and playing an elf is too difficult and nobody wants to like actually think about how you play a 100 yo elf (plus they're OLD) ).
But someone would always bitch that he/she can't make a character with such harsh restrictions. Eventually he/she will pick a half elf of course anyway.... but a point is,

the problem of basing character on a gimmick like a race has same roots as basing whole character around say sexuality. It's an inherently primitive character building (but which exists everywhere as any primitive roleplaying) so when they try to sell you character on a fact that hesomgsogay, know that 40 yo lonely woman making him probably has same writing qualities as that player who made a half vampire half drow. People in general, most of them, are not GRRMartins and simply have no skill to create a lasting impression on character in just a few sentences, so they go for what easily stands out and looks memorable to them.

Also will not lie. I have done this a lot. Half elves or aasamir all the way down.

Its kinda why I like crpgs better now. You basically just pick the race and go. Past is entirely irrelevent almost and your actions in the present determine who you are and what you stand for. Even if the game does allow bios their never more than 3 paragraphs and probably don't mesh with the characters in game backstory in the first place so there's no reason to even bother with it then.

 

[Cael]

I really don't see any problem here and yet you are displaying a lot of angst over it.

A lot of angst? You seem to be projecting, I only made a simple observation. The problem is a literary and contextual one, how do you write a paladin to not be out of place with other characters who are more let's say flawed, yet still retain their "devotion to goodness". And how would that character look like and behave.

Learn to read. I answered your question.

 

[Shilandra]

I really don't see any problem here and yet you are displaying a lot of angst over it.

A lot of angst? You seem to be projecting, I only made a simple observation. The problem is a literary and contextual one, how do you write a paladin to not be out of place with other characters who are more let's say flawed, yet still retain their "devotion to goodness". And how would that character look like and behave.

Can't paladins be evil too? And also neutral? Its about the god they worship right?

 

[SausageInYourFace]

Some guys lack the creativity to come up with a cool character concept so they stick to the archetypes they already know; some fedora tippers think they are master roleplayers and come up with some weird crazy concept and thats not inherently better than the other.

I don't mind me some archetypes in my fantasy game, its fantasy after all and I play it to immerse myself in a fantasy world, well-known tropes and all. The line between trope and cliche is thin and subjective and ultimately it all boils down to execution. In that regard I find the sheer number of possible companions more alarming than the little blurbs that really tell us nothing about how they will turn out.

 

[Cael]

I really don't see any problem here and yet you are displaying a lot of angst over it.

A lot of angst? You seem to be projecting, I only made a simple observation. The problem is a literary and contextual one, how do you write a paladin to not be out of place with other characters who are more let's say flawed, yet still retain their "devotion to goodness". And how would that character look like and behave.

Can't paladins be evil too? And also neutral? Its about the god they worship right?

Originally, as defined in DnD, paladins can only be Lawful Good. Their roots is in the Arthurian legends: the pious, chivalric paragon of knightly ideals.

However, you can define them as fanatical warriors of faith given special powers by their god because of their devotion to the ideals favoured by their particular god. In other words, a holy warrior.

For example, in one of my DnD 3.5 settings, I have Lawful Neutral paladins of a Lawful Neutral god. Instead of Detect Evil, they get Detect Lies. Instead of aura of good, they get an aura of law. They get to pick a domain from Law, War and Inquisition ("normal" paladins get to pick from Good, Law and War).

 

[Shadenuat]

Let's be straight: paladins were about being a good christian. Basically collecting all the green circles in Crusader Kings and avoiding red circles. TSR even had a book about charlemagne paladins and crusades too.

Concidering how popular being a good christian is today, no wonder they can't find their place in modern fantasy. Even gods can't find place in it, as they get killed by atheist designers.

AD&D classes are in many ways mythological, not technical. And if you don't have a correct mythological setup in your setting, then paladins won't fit it. They're about playing romantical historical knight. Pick up old TSR paladin's book to see examples of characters they provide for play. Remember, the original idea behind class is that it's not just a package of abilities, it's a roleplaying package that has abilities that fit it.

 

[fantadomat]

This a real paladin,not some would be English knights. A paladin is holy warrior,warrior of God.

Yeah,i am aware the words etymology,its roots in Latin and Charlemagne's usage of it. And yeah the word's meaning changes throughout the ages and now it means holy warrior or something similar.

 

[Roguey]

Can't paladins be evil too? And also neutral? Its about the god they worship right?

Not Paladins the D&D class. Being a Blackguard, the evil equivalent requires

Base Attack Bonus

+6.
Skills

Hide 5 ranks, Knowledge (religion) 2 ranks.
Feats

Cleave, Improved Sunder, Power Attack.
Special

The character must have made peaceful contact with an evil outsider who was summoned by him or someone else.

 

[Shilandra]

Let's be straight: paladins were about being a good christian. Basically collecting all the green circles in Crusader Kings and avoiding red circles. TSR even had a book about charlemagne paladins and crusades too.

Concidering how popular being a good christian is today, no wonder they can't find their place in modern fantasy. Even gods can't find place in it, as they get killed by atheist designers.

AD&D classes are in many ways mythological, not technical. And if you don't have a correct mythological setup in your setting, then paladins won't fit it. They're about playing romantical historical knight. Pick up old TSR paladin's book to see examples of characters they provide for play. Remember, the original idea behind class is that it's not just a package of abilities, it's a roleplaying package that has abilities that fit it.

How do we stop this? Mythologies collapsing under the weight of the designers sneering contempt of the very concept? Playing around with pantheons and archetypal myths shouldn't really be that hard or warrant instant dismissal or derision.

 

[Lacrymas]

Let's be straight: paladins were about being a good christian.

The problem is obviously the "good Christian" part and what they means. It means a lot of different things to a lot of people. If we transport it outside its religious text, as D&D obviously has, it turns out being good in general is not like the cartoons and children's books promised us it is. If you take it too literally you end up riding a donkey, fighting sheep and dreaming of the unseen Dulcinea. You can see this with Ajantis in BG1, he's comically out of place in the cast, even with such basic characterizations for everyone.

 

[Cael]

How do we stop this? Mythologies collapsing under the weight of the designers sneering contempt of the very concept? Playing around with pantheons and archetypal myths shouldn't really be that hard or warrant instant dismissal or derision.

It would require that humans stop believing that their very existence somehow affects the entirety of of the universe. Every post-modern belief, bandwagon and cause has this as its underpinning, from the idea that humans can destroy the world through nothing but unintended carelessness to the outright idea that humans are the masters of their own fate and that nothing, not tradition, not religion/god, not even the laws of physics can stand in the way.

In other words, we're fucked.

 

[Moonrise]

Paladins in D&D/PF are knights of medieval romance, except in worlds where the existence of god is explicit, their righteousness is fueled by more than placebo, and good and evil are factual notions. That makes them more heroic and less fallible. You can't argue that their crusades are nothing but vainglorious war when demons are literally real. There's little room for gray morality, because they lose their powers on an alignment shift. The bounds of moral failure that can be atoned for are much tighter than for the knights of legend. The only way to make a nuanced paladin is to make an ex-paladin. Evil paladins make sense, but seldom for players. They're still honor bound. But the concept of a non-lawful paladin is just retarded. PF is crunchier than D&D, but the variants all boil down to codes and oaths. So when you ask what does a paladin do, take a normal person and give them a 24/7 on-call job where the requirements are to do good and vanquish evil. You can't pull a Seinfeld and absolve yourself of responsibility by choosing not to intervene. The only thing that might stay your hand is a sense of priority via threat assessment. It's restrictive, but some jobs require that you give up your rights due to the responsibilities the work entails, and in exchange for privileges. That doesn't mean there's no room for personality.

 

[Cael]

The only way to make a nuanced paladin is to make an ex-paladin.

Andri Aeyliros.

 

[Shadenuat]

The problem is obviously the "good Christian" part and what they means. It means a lot of different things to a lot of people. If we transport it outside its religious text, as D&D obviously has, it turns out being good in general is not like the cartoons and children's books promised us it is. If you take it too literally you end up riding a donkey, fighting sheep and dreaming of the unseen Dulcinea. You can see this with Ajantis in BG1, he's comically out of place in the cast, even with such basic characterizations for everyone.

That's the whole idea behind Paladin class, not the problem.

It was expected a lot of being a good person, i.e. an ideal. Obviously to fulfill that ideal by 100% is not possible. But to strive for that ideal and constantly face challenges and questions of what is to be good is how, in general, roleplaying Paladin would be; that and fulfulling feudal/cultural/religious obligations of course.

That is the most challenging thing about roleplaying paladin (after constantly facing moral dilemmas about good & evil) - your OBLIGATIONS. Which always will, of course, clash with what might be good or evil in a particular scenario, especially when provided by a shrewd DM.

And as I am sure everyone understands, modern players are not the type to like ANY obligations.

BG1 had a lot of comical characters btw, I would't say Ajantis is any different from liver eating halfling or raging feminist with daddy issues.

Also, riding donkeys and fighting windmills is a perfectly viable character concept, provided right setting and circumstances. Erritis in Numenera is somewhat similar in concept with a dark tweeeest.

 

[Lacrymas]

Every post-modern belief, bandwagon and cause has this as its underpinning, from the idea that humans can destroy the world through nothing but unintended carelessness to the outright idea that humans are the masters of their own fate and that nothing, not tradition, not religion/god, not even the laws of physics can stand in the way.

In other words, we're fucked.

None of this is postmodern, especially the part of humans being the masters of their own fate.

That's the whole idea behind Paladin class, not the problem.

It was expected a lot of being a good person, i.e. an ideal. Obviously to fulfill that ideal by 100% is not possible. But to strive for that ideal and constantly face challenges and questions of what is to be good is how, in general, roleplaying Paladin would be; that and fulfulling feudal/cultural/religious obligations of course.

That is the most challenging thing about roleplaying paladin - your OBLIGATIONS.

And as I am sure everyone understands, modern players are not the type to like ANY obligations.

BG1 had a lot of comical characters btw, I would't say Ajantis is any different from liver eating halfling or raging feminist with daddy issues.

The first part of what you are saying is already not like the classical depiction of paladins in D&D and similar fantasy spaces, though. Struggling with how to be a good person seems like a great idea for a paladin character, especially when you are expected to be a monster to survive a monstrous world. I don't know such a character in a video game, however.

I didn't mean Ajantis is comical in a "ha-ha" kind of way, but that his straightforward naivete really contrasts with the other cast members.

 

[Cael]

Every post-modern belief, bandwagon and cause has this as its underpinning, from the idea that humans can destroy the world through nothing but unintended carelessness to the outright idea that humans are the masters of their own fate and that nothing, not tradition, not religion/god, not even the laws of physics can stand in the way.

In other words, we're fucked.

None of this is postmodern, especially the part of humans being the masters of their own fate.

Arrogant SJW-ism isn't postmodern, then? OK.

 

[Lacrymas]

Arrogant SJW-ism isn't postmodern, then? OK.

No, it isn't. There is nothing postmodern about the sujelians and identity politics, quite the contrary. Their 'grand narrative' about the West being an oppressive patriarchy under which minorities suffer is contrary to postmodernism.

 

[Cael]

That's the whole idea behind Paladin class, not the problem.

It was expected a lot of being a good person, i.e. an ideal. Obviously to fulfill that ideal by 100% is not possible. But to strive for that ideal and constantly face challenges and questions of what is to be good is how, in general, roleplaying Paladin would be; that and fulfulling feudal/cultural/religious obligations of course.

That is the most challenging thing about roleplaying paladin - your OBLIGATIONS.

And as I am sure everyone understands, modern players are not the type to like ANY obligations.

BG1 had a lot of comical characters btw, I would't say Ajantis is any different from liver eating halfling or raging feminist with daddy issues.

To be fair, every one of the divine classes has duties and obligations. It is just that the rest tend to be ignored while the paladin gets reamed constantly. It is more a case of bad DM than bad class in terms of roleplaying.

That said, mechanically, the paladin is a pretty lousy class even in its early incarnations. Their special abilities really didn't give them enough oomph to balance out the other requirements (especially the RP ones when you have a bad DM) to really bother. If I wanted to play a paladin type character, I'd play a fighter, a knight or a fighter/cleric instead. 3.5 upped the ante with the Ordained Champion prestige class which basically made the paladin obsolete from a mechanical perspective.

 

[Tacgnol]

Pathfinder has an archetype called the Gray Paladin (which is allowed to be Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral) for people who want more options when rolling a paladin. Still, most of the problems with paladins in tabletop games come from players pushing the Lawful Stupid trope too hard.

It is entirely possible to play a non-retarded Lawful Good character.

 

[Payd Shell]

Arrogant SJW-ism isn't postmodern, then? OK.

A Jordan Peterson fan, I see.

 

[Strange Fellow]

 

[Cael]

Pathfinder has an archetype called the Gray Paladin which is allowed to be Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral for people who want more options when rolling a paladin. Still, most of the problems with paladins in tabletop games come from players pushing the Lawful Stupid trope too hard.

It is entirely possible to play a non-retarded Lawful Good character.

Given that the Book of Exalted Deeds spent about 30 pages iterating how NOT to be a Lawful Stupid twat, I'd say the creators of the game were well aware of where the players were taking things... :D